logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1981. 3. 10. 선고 80누303 판결
[양도소득세등부과처분취소][집29(1)행,91;공1981.5.1.(655) 13805]
Main Issues

Whether the transfer date on the register can be determined as the transfer date in case where the transferor of assets fails to make the preliminary return of transfer margin, etc.

Summary of Judgment

In case where the transferor of assets fails to make the preliminary return of transfer margin or the final return of tax base, the transfer date of assets shall be recognized by evidence, and it cannot be concluded that the transfer date on the register becomes the transfer date on the transfer income tax immediately.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 27 of the Income Tax Act

Defendant-Appellant

Plaintiff 1 and three legal representatives of the above Plaintiffs 2 through 4, the father of parental authority, the Nonparty, and the Plaintiff 1’s attorney-at-law

Defendant-Appellee

Head of Seogju Tax Office

Judgment of the lower court

Gwangju High Court Decision 79Gu92 delivered on April 30, 1980

Text

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court.

Reasons

The plaintiffs' grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below held that the transfer income tax and the defense tax are imposed on the income from the transfer of the above land by failing to report the actual transfer date to the plaintiffs on March 5, 1979 due to the lack of dispute between the parties and the actual transfer date; since the plaintiffs acquired two lots of land as an issue on April 30, 1976 and transferred 304 as well as the transfer date on February 25, 1978, and that the above transfer date was due to the transfer date of the above land, and that the transfer price was not determined at the time of transfer under the above provision of the Income Tax Act by failing to report the transfer date at the time of transfer of the above land, and that the transfer price at the time of transfer of the above land was not determined at the time of transfer under the premise that the transfer price at the time of transfer was not determined at the time of transfer under the above provision of the Income Tax Act by failing to report the transfer price at the time of transfer. However, the court below held that the transfer price at the time of transfer price at the above time was not determined at that time.

Therefore, the appeal on this issue is with merit. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed and the case is remanded to the court of the court of the original instance for further deliberation and judgment.

This decision is consistent with the opinions of the involved judges.

Justices Dra-ro (Presiding Justice)

arrow